1 Law Offices HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP 2 2375 E. Camelback Rd. Suite 750 3 Phoenix, AZ 85016 602-631-4400 4 602-631-4404 [email protected] 5 Stephen W. Tully (014076) 6 ALLISTER ADEL 7 MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY 8 Thomas P. Liddy (019384) Emily Craiger (021728) 9 Joseph I. Vigil (018677) Joseph J. Branco (031474) 10 Joseph E. LaRue (031348) Deputy County Attorneys 11 [email protected] [email protected] 12 [email protected] [email protected] 13 [email protected] 14 CIVIL SERVICES DIVISION 225 West Madison Street 15 Phoenix, Arizona 85003 Telephone (602) 506-8541 16 Facsimile (602) 506-4317 17 [email protected] 18 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Maricopa County IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA 19 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA 20 21 MARICOPA COUNTY; CLINT HICKMAN, ) No. CaseNumber in his official capacity as Chairman of the ) 22 Maricopa County Board of Supervisors; and ) COMPLAINT JACK SELLERS, STEVE CHUCRI, BILL ) (DECLARATORY RELIEF) 23 GATES, and STEVE GALLARDO, in their ) official capacities as Members of the Maricopa ) 24 County Board of Supervisors, ) ) 25 Plaintiffs, ) ) 26 v. ) ) 2900\307200098.v1 1 KAREN FANN, in her official capacity as ) President of the Arizona Senate; EDDIE ) 2 FARNSWORTH, in his official capacity as ) Chairman of the Arizona Senate Judiciary ) 3 Committee; RICK GRAY, in his official ) capacity as Vice Chairman of the Arizona ) 4 Senate Judiciary Committee; SONNY ) BORRELLI, VINCE LEACH, LUPE ) 5 CONTRERAS, ANDREA DALESSANDRO, ) and MARTIN QUEZADA, in their official ) 6 capacities as the Members of the Arizona ) Senate Judiciary Committee, ) 7 ) Defendants. ) 8 ) 9 Come now Plaintiffs MARICOPA COUNTY; CLINT HICKMAN, in his official 10 capacity as Chairman of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors; and JACK 11 SELLERS, STEVE CHUCRI, BILL GATES, and STEVE GALLARDO, in their official 12 capacities as Members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, (together, the 13 “Plaintiff Maricopa County”), and for their Complaint state as follows: 14 INTRODUCTION 15 “We have seen that the tendency of republican governments is to an 16 aggrandizement of the legislative at the expense of the other departments” James 17 Madison Federalist 49. 18 1. At 3:08 p.m. on the afternoon of December 15, 2020, the Arizona Senate 19 Judiciary Committee (the “Committee”) served two subpoenas on the Maricopa County 20 Board of Supervisors (the “Subpoenas”). 21 2. Each subpoena seeks documents listed in a separate exhibit attached to the 22 subpoena. One subpoena seeks documents necessary to perform a “Full Forensic Audit” 23 of the Maricopa County 2020 election. (A copy of the Full Forensic Audit Subpoena is 24 attached as Exhibit 1). 25 26 2 2900\307200098.v1 1 3. The other subpoena seeks documents necessary to perform a “Scanned 2 Ballot Audit” of the ballots cast in Maricopa County in the most recent election. (A copy 3 of the Scanned Ballot Audit subpoena is attached as Exhibit 2). 4 4. The requests are shocking in scope and far in excess of the power of the 5 Senate President or Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman to command. The requests 6 ought to send chills down the spine of every freedom loving Arizonan as they threaten 7 one of the core tenants of our republic, the right to a secret ballot. 8 5. The Full Forensic Audit subpoena seeks access to, among other things, the 9 electronic voting machines used in Maricopa County, the software for the equipment, and 10 hardware forensic images of all the elections servers, desktops, and removable media 11 used to transfer ballots to central counting. It seeks all election log files, all usernames 12 and passwords, all encryption passwords and all security tokens. It requests a data base of 13 the voter rolls. And it requests much more. Essentially it requests full access to the entire 14 voting system. The subpoena requests this electronic information “for inspection, testing 15 or sampling thereof”. 16 6. The Scanned Ballot Audit subpoena requests the County to turn over 17 images of all mail-in ballots cast in the last election and demands that such images be 18 “uploaded to a computer drive supplied by the Senate Judiciary Committee or its agents”. 19 7. The Subpoenas commanded the Board of Supervisors to produce this 20 extraordinarily-voluminous amount of data, electronic files, ballots, forensic images, 21 logs, paper rolls, and machines by 5:00 p.m. on December 18, 2020—a mere three days 22 after the Subpoenas were served. 23 8. The Subpoenas are unlawful. 24 9. Rather than wait for the possibility of the Senate holding the County in 25 contempt and then on an emergency basis asking the Court to rule on the legality of the 26 3 2900\307200098.v1 1 subpoenas and any contempt order, the County is asking the Court for a declaration that 2 the Subpoenas are unlawful and to quash them. 3 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4 10. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgments 5 Act, A.R.S. § 12-1831 et seq., and A.R.S. § 12-1801. 6 11. There is a present controversy, the Senate has issued the subpoenas and it 7 believes its subpoenas are legal and the Defendants refuse to comply. The subpoenas 8 contain the threat of contempt sanctions. 9 12. The events giving rise to this action happened in Maricopa County. The 10 Arizona Senate that is presided over by Defendant President Fann, and includes the 11 Defendant Committee, sits in Maricopa County. Venue is therefore proper. A.R.S. § 12- 12 401. 13 13. Pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 26.2(b)(3), this case is entitled to Tier 3 status as 14 it involves a complex issue of law. 15 PARTIES 16 14. Maricopa County, a Plaintiff in this action, is a jural entity with power to 17 sue and be sued, which power is exercised by the Board of Supervisors. A.R.S. § 11- 18 201(A). 19 15. Plaintiff Clint Hickman is the Chairman of the Maricopa County Board of 20 Supervisors. He brings this suit in his official capacity. 21 16. Plaintiff Jack Sellers is a Member of the Maricopa County Board of 22 Supervisors. He brings this suit in his official capacity. 23 17. Plaintiff Steve Chucri is a Member of the Maricopa County Board of 24 Supervisors. He brings this suit in his official capacity. 25 18. Plaintiff Bill Gates is a Member of the Maricopa County Board of 26 Supervisors. He brings this suit in his official capacity. 4 2900\307200098.v1 1 19. Plaintiff Steve Gallardo is a Member of the Maricopa County Board of 2 Supervisors. He brings this suit in his official capacity. 3 20. Defendant Karen Fann is the President of the Arizona Senate. She is being 4 sued in her official capacity only. 5 21. Defendant Eddie Farnsworth is the Chairman of the Arizona Senate 6 Judiciary Committee. He is being sued in his official capacity only. 7 22. Defendant Rick Gray is the Vice Chairman of the Arizona Senate Judiciary 8 Committee. He is being sued in his official capacity only. 9 23. Defendant Sonny Borrelli is a Member of the Arizona Senate Judiciary 10 Committee. He is being sued in his official capacity only. 11 24. Defendant Vince Leach is a Member of the Arizona Senate Judiciary 12 Committee. He is being sued in his official capacity only. 13 25. Defendant Lupe Contreras is a Member of the Arizona Senate Judiciary 14 Committee. He is being sued in his official capacity only. 15 26. Defendant Andrea Dalessandro is a Member of the Arizona Senate 16 Judiciary Committee. She is being sued in her official capacity only. 17 27. Defendant Martin Quezada is a Member of the Arizona Senate Judiciary 18 Committee. He is being sued in his official capacity only. 19 FACTS 20 28. Plaintiff Maricopa County conducted a general election on November 3, 21 2020, which included an election for presidential electors (the “Election”). 22 29. All of the vote tabulators and ballot printers, used by Plaintiff Maricopa 23 County to conduct the Election had been certified by the Arizona secretary of state and 24 also by a laboratory that is accredited by the United States Elections Assistance 25 Commission pursuant to the federal Help America Vote Act, as Arizona law requires. 26 A.R.S. § 16-442. 5 2900\307200098.v1 1 30. After the Election, numerous challenges and election contests were filed in 2 superior court contesting the results, as provided for by A.R.S. § 16-671 et seq. Plaintiffs 3 in these cases included President Donald Trump, the Arizona Republican Party, and the 4 Chairwoman of the Arizona Republican Party, Dr. Kelli Ward. 5 31. Each of the cases alleged some form of misconduct by elections officers, 6 erroneous vote counts, unlawful voting, or deprivation of the right to vote. None of the 7 cases were successful, and no court found that any misconduct, erroneous vote counts, or 8 unlawful voting had occurred such that the results of the Election should be overturned. 9 Each legal challenge was ultimately dismissed. The cases filed in Maricopa County 10 Superior Court included: 11 • Aguilera v. Fontes, No. CV2020-014083 (voluntarily dismissed, November 12 7, 2020). 13 • Donald J. Trump v. Hobbs, No. CV2020-014248 (Min. Entry Order, 14 November 13, 2020 (after conducting an evidentiary hearing, dismissing the 15 complaint with prejudice). 16 • Arizona Republican Party v. Fontes, No. CV2020-014553 (Min. Entry 17 Order, November 18, 2020 (dismissing the complaint with prejudice and 18 ordering that the Secretary of State, who had requested her fees, could file a 19 motion pursuant to AR.S.